[_alaya]

> They're going to send the jobs where the wages are cheaper, and that's exactly what they're doing.

I read these sentiments, and I honestly don’t understand the tone. This kind of behavior is exactly what you’d expect after taking just a few introductory undergraduate economics courses.

Free markets are predicated on the free movement of capital and labor, and American companies being able to go overseas for cheaper labor is exactly what they're going to do unless there are laws preventing that. When we have laws keeping jobs in one place they get called "regulation."

Generally speaking, I’m really shocked at how uneducated people are — programmers in particular — about how the labor market works, how the economy works, or how anything in the real world works, really.

There's a reason studying humanities is valuable - history, philosophy, economics, etc. It clues you in that when someone wants to exploit you, it's usually based on well-established precedent.

[palmotea]

>> They're going to send the jobs where the wages are cheaper, and that's exactly what they're doing.

> I read these sentiments, and I honestly don’t understand the tone. This kind of behavior is exactly what you’d expect after taking just a few introductory undergraduate economics courses.

You'll notice I was responding to something I quoted. They claim they're taking action X because of Y, when they're actually taking action X because of Z. Changing Y will do nothing about X. Hence the tone.

Also, the eight most terrifying words in the English language "I just took few introductory undergraduate economics courses..."

[_alaya]

Gotcha, looks like I misread what you were saying.

> Also, the eight most terrifying words in the English language "I just took few introductory undergraduate economics courses..."

Fair enough, but I at least have a whole degree in it. :)

[bigbadfeline]

I'm not the person you replied to but I don't see how your comment relates to his, I mean, did you reply to the wrong comment? Do you understand the difference between "talent" and "cheap labor"?

> Generally speaking, I’m really shocked at how uneducated people are — programmers in particular — about how the labor market works, how the economy works, or how anything in the real world works, really.

You provided zero evidence for any of these sins in the comment you replied to. I'm kind of shocked how economists get shocked out of thin air, it seems they make everything out of thin but highly compressed air.

> There's a reason studying humanities is valuable - history, philosophy, economics, etc.

There's a reason why people avoid these - in their present form, they provide zero practical value and even worse, teaching them amounts mainly to shamanistic incantations designed to confuse and hide the truth -e.g. BS about "talent" when the issue is "cheap labor".

[_alaya]

To clarify, I agree the issue is "cheap labor," not "talent." My previous comment was built on that premise.

I was pointing out that capital seeking lower wages is a standard economic outcome and my surprise was directed at how often folks in the tech industry seem caught off guard by basic profit-maximizing behavior. That's just what companies do and they are expected to do so.

Regarding the value of studying economics: it provides the exact framework needed to see past corporate PR. When companies claim they are offshoring for "talent," basic economics gives you the analytical tools to quickly recognize that the real motivation is reducing labor costs.